| 1 |
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 5:43 AM, Peter Stuge <peter@×××××.se> wrote: |
| 2 |
> Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 3 |
>> I personally find it annoying when people fork projects, decide not to |
| 4 |
>> maintain ABI compatibility with the original project, and then keep |
| 5 |
>> filenames the same/etc such that the packages collide in their |
| 6 |
>> recommended configurations. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> Some people do it on purpose, with the outspoken goal of doing |
| 9 |
> maximum harm to the original project and lock users into the fork. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
In such cases it probably would be helpful if distros talked to each |
| 13 |
other and agreed to hack the build so that the new files would not |
| 14 |
collide. That then leaves the upstream package with two choices - |
| 15 |
keep their build the same so that anybody who uses it to develop |
| 16 |
against their library ends up with a build that doesn't work on any |
| 17 |
actual distro, or play nice. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
A NyxOS-like approach where you just prefix EVERYTHING on the system |
| 20 |
might also work. However, you'd still have issues unless you patched |
| 21 |
anything that looked in a common area to not do that (like looking for |
| 22 |
init.d scripts and systemd units - there wouldn't be an /etc/init.d, |
| 23 |
but rather a bazillion /pkg/guid/etc/init.d directories or something |
| 24 |
like that). Also note, I'm not saying NyxOS does it this way - I |
| 25 |
don't know exactly what they are doing. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
-- |
| 28 |
Rich |
Archives